SUMNER BAR.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXV, Issue 16550, 14 May 1914, Page 9

SUMNER BAR.

BOARD AND COUNCIL IN

CONFERENCE

A SETTLEMENT IN VIEW

A conference between the Lvttelton Harbour Boajd an* Me Sumner Borough Council Ttas liafa ot the Lyttelton Harbour Board',"*- omen yesterday, to discuss tbo positdois created by tlic refusal of the- Harbour Board to continue to maintain a signal station at Sumner. By the request of both parties, the Minister t? Marine (the Hon F. M. B. Fisher) presided, and there were also present Messrs R. Moore (chairman), A. Kayo, C. Allison and 0. J. Williams (secretary), representing the Harbour Board, and Messrs G. \? C. Smithson (Mayor), the Hon J. ttarr and J. Middleton (town clerk), representing the Council. The chairman having stated that the, object of the meeting wTls to arrive* at a decisicßUJatisfactory to both bodies, a discussion was commenced. Mr -Moore said that tho signal station was a survival from tho days when there-was trading between Sumner antl Heatbcote. Since the building of tho tunnel shipping had ceased, so that from a trado point of view there was no necessity for th,r station. The owners of pleasure bi/p-is had every opportunity to study the peculiarities, of tho bar, and the Board's dutv was to use its revenue on behalf of importers and exporters, and to forward the interests of the port of-Lvttelron. The money spent at Sumner by the Board had for several years been money wasted. Mr Smithson said ho believed the Board's decision was largely due to the fact that Sumner had oppose J a Bill giving tho Board control of the foreshore of the borough. Tho Council did not wish that money should bo spent for the benefit of Sumner people, but .for tho safety of the people of Christchurch and Canterbury who used pleasure boats at Sumner*. The bar was a dangerous ono, and a signal station was necessary in the interests of public safety. The Board should withdraw from the foreshore altogether if it would not continue the lifeboat and signal stations. Mr Kaye said the Board had interpreted the attitude of the Sumner people to mean that they desired the Boardto withdraw from Sumner. Some time in the future, however, the Board might improve tho bar and make it safe for certain classes of shipping, and it was therefore wise that the Board should retain control of some part of the foreshore. Mr Barr asked if the Board was willing to vest the Sumner Pier in the Council. Sumner had no money to waste, but it would consider any reasonable proposition the Board might make concerning the vesting i of the pier and lifeboats in the Conn- j cil

Tlio chairman said he had understood the Council was not in a, strong enough financial position to take over the pier and the- lifeboats. Representatives of the Council said they vrero in agreement that tho Council could not undertake maintenance unless tho property were handed ever to the Council. Tho chairman asked if the Board, in the event of its acquiring the rights over tho foreshore sought in its Bill, would undertake to maintain tho lifeboats and signal service. Mr Moore said he would recommend tho Board to do so. He offered to let the Council take over the Board's property at tho valuation at which it stood in tho Board's hooks. Tho chairman said this would include reserves. Tt was to his mind a most liberal offer.

Mr Moore said the valuation vas £849, exclusive of the boat-harbour, which was valued at £9'!S. The boatharbour valuation, however, might be reduced by an independent valuation Mr Barr said the valuation appealed to him. but it could not be accepted until after reference to the Council. Mr Allison said he must oppose Sumner having control of the foreshore if that would interfere with the construction of a ship canal or channel . '

The chairman said that in tho event of a canal being built Parliament would give all tho foreshore rights necessary.

Tho conference then terminated, the delegates promising to lay tho conclusions arrived nt before tho bodies represented. A vote of thanks to tho chairman concluded the proceedings.